Herring v. Herring

Hill, Justice,

concurring specially.

Although I concur in the judgment of the court dismissing three of the appeals as moot, I suggest that this long standing rule of law possibly should be re-examined. Because no argument has been made in this case urging such re-examination, it would be inappropriate for us to undertake it in this case.

If a person is found in contempt of court and ordered confined to jail, his appeal from that order becomes moot upon his release from confinement (Cagle v. PMC Development Co., 233 Ga. 583, supra), because, as I understand the reasoning, the time spent in jail can never be restored to him even if an appellate court were to rule in his favor on the merits of the case.

However, I question whether this same reasoning applies to the payment of a sum of money. Generally a person can be made financially whole after he has paid the required amount, if on appeal the merits are reached and he is successful.